One problem we have with this issue is that gun contol advocates and politicians seem to take the term “gun control” too literally and this leads to things like bans on large magazines and similar technical panacea that don’t even begin to address the real problem. Is a drunken caveman really going to refrain from shooting his wife because he only has 10 rounds in his AR rather than 30? I am not saying measures like this are useless, but they do rather miss the point. There are something like 200 million guns out there. There is no plausible way to round them up. They could be buried or hidden by the millions and a cottage industry of clandestine workshops would develop overnight to make millions more. If we banned them tomorrow, people would still be killing each other with them a thousand years from now.

What we need is gun owner control. I can understand why politicians might be “gun shy” about that exact term, but I am sure they could come up with a suitable euphemism. They could call the legislation the “Second Amendment Heroes’ Honor and Responsibility Act” or something.

I have been flying planes and choppers for 50 years. I have a pilot’s license and nobody anywhere would suggest that I should be allowed to fly without one.
Similarly, I used to teach young people. I have a teacher’s license. I was a deputy sheriff in my misspent youth, so I have a police officer’s license. I drive motor vehicles on the public roads so I have a driver’s license.

I own several guns, though, and I don’t have a gun owner’s license. The reason is simple: There is no such thing in Texas.

I am willing to make a deal with the ammosexuals: We don’t care what kind of guns they have, short of artillery, or how many, provided they prove they know how to shoot, know the law, can be located when we might need them, are willing to take a psychological profile test, can afford a nominal fee and liability insurance, and don’t have restraining orders, indictments, or summary judgments, past or present, against them.